Faraday's contributions to chemistry - Journal of Chemical Education

FARADAY'S CONTRIBUTIONS TO CHEMISTRY* During the early years of his connection with the Royal Institution, Faraday worked almost exclusively in the field of chemistry and made sweral major contributions to this science. About 1830 and thereafter his investigations were mainly in electricity and magnetism, though he did some epochal work in electro-chemistry, liquefaction of gases, and colloids. He mainteined a n interest i n chemistry throughout his long career. Many of his lectures were i n chemistry. For over thirty years he was professor of chemistry in the Royal Institution. Faraday was engaged as an assistant in the chemical laboratory of the Royal Institution when a mere lad. He rose rapidly through various grades to professor of chemistry (1833), and retained this title for the rest of his long life. His contributions to chemistry began early in 1816 and continued without interruption to about 1830. The major contributions were "The Liquefaction of Gases," "The Isolation of Benzene and Butylene," "Preparation of Alloys of Steel," "Manufacture of Optical Glass," and "The Preparation of Several Organic Compounds Containing Chlorine." Among his later contributions we should include the second investigation of the liquefaction of gases and the investigation of the relation between electricity and chemical action which led to the law bearing his name and to the terms now in use to describe electrolysis. Faraday's only book in chemistry was "Chemical Manipulations." However, two others have his name on the title page, viz., "Chemical History of a Candle" and "Experimental Researches." For upward of ten years Faraday acted as a private assistant to Davy and a lecture assistant to both Davy and Brande. When Davy retired in 1825, Faraday practically assumed control of the chemistry a t the Royal Institution. He a t once plunged into chemical investigations long held in the leash and also established several lecture courses in chemistry which have continued to the present day. He himself delivered over one thousand lectures in chemistry during his career. Faraday's engagement dates from March 1, 1813. He was to be paid 25s. a week, besides the use of two rooms in the house. His duties were in sharp contrast to his meager pay, and were specifically thus laid down by the managers: To attend and assist the Lecturers and professors in preparing for, and during. lectures. Where any instruments or apparatus may be required, to attend to their careful removal from the model room and laboratory to the lecture-room, and to clean and replace them after being used, reporting to the managers such accidents as shall require repair, a constant diary being kept by him for that purpose. That one day in each * Read before the Division of History of Chemistry at the 81st meeting of the American Chemical Society, Indianapolis, Indiana, March 30 to April 3, 1931. 1493

1494

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION

Auousr, 1931

week he be employed in keeping clean the models in the repository, and that all the instruments in the glass cases be cleaned and dusted at least once within a month.

In addition to this array of tasks, he was also to serve as Davy's private assistant. And thus began the scientific career of Michael Faraday at the Royal Institution where he was to achieve brilliant success during the ensuing half century. Scarcely settled in his new position, he not only utilized all opportunities for improvement at the Royal Institution but also estahI k u o ~ AS s TIE A P P ~ ~ DURING X R ~ THE EAKLYYEANS lished definite relations O F HIS CONNECTIOX WITH THE ROYALINSTITUTION with the C i t y Philosophical Society, a small group of young men who met weekly for mutual improvement. These privileges were soon interrupted, because seven months after his appointment, he accepted Davy's invitation to travel as his assistant on the continent. Although this tour was made under trying circumstances, due mainly to the overbearing attitude of Lady Davy, the scientific experiences gave Faraday a fresh impulse to study chemistry and to extend his knowledge of men and things. Friendships with de la Rive (father and son) and other scientists made on this tour were continued to Faraday's advantage for many years. Returning to London in 1815, his appointment a t the Royal Institution was renewed, and he was promoted to a higher and more responsible position. It is significant that in September, 1815, the handwriting in the laboratory notebook of the Institution changed from the large running letters of Brande to the small neat handwriting of Faraday. Faraday, like many youths of his period, kept a commonplace book. He had an inborn passion for keeping notes of all kinds. Perhaps this tendency was accentuated by his early association with books and bookbinding. Be

1496


AUGUST, 1931

that as it may, it is a fact that Faraday took and preserved notes from the days when as a youth he listened to the lectures of Davy until the infumities of old age compelled him to lay aside his pen. Faraday's earliest commonplace books are a mine of information about his interest in chemistry. Though the records in these books are not fully available, I have culled some items from various sources. The entries are more than mere records or questions. Many suggest a line of investigation. Some are marked "answered," or "made out." Others are hints which were doubtless incorporated into his work without further comment. I cite only a few of the items recorded soon after Faraday resumed his work upon the return in 1815 from the uncomfortable journey with Davy on the continent. These items (titles abbreviated) indicate that a t this early date Faraday was thinking widely and wisely about chemistry: Tests for baryta, strantis, and lime. Made out. Sulphur and red lead. Phosphorus and nitrate of silver and nitrate of ammonia. Light on peroxide of zinc. Distillation of oxalate of ammonia. Action of silver oxide, chloride, fluoride, and hramide on ammonia, and nature of compound formed. Production of chloride of calcium and ammonia. Chromium compounds. Silvering of silk and other animal substances. Phosphoret of carbon. Arsenic acid as a test for zinc. Test to distinguish barytes from stroutia. Muriate of silver and ammonia. Tellurium on sulphur. Chlorine and carbon. Mutual action of muriate and nitrate of ammonia.

When these early notebooks of Faraday are available in full* we shall doubtless find in them indisputable evidence that Faraday was essentially a chemist, certainly in the decade from 1816 to 1826. At this time (1815) Faraday was the assistant of both Brande and Davy, and his duties brought him into intimate relationship with both, especially with Davy who was working on the safety lamp. But Faraday was an assistant only in name. He had awakened, and was prepared to give as well as to absorb. Early in 1816 he delivered a lecture "On the General Properties of Matteru-his first scientific lecture-before the City Philosophical Society. Later in the year he published a paper "On the Analysis of Some Native Caustic Limeuphis first scientific paper-in the Quarterly Journal of Science (the official organ, a t that time, of the Royal Institution). Neither contribution was very important to science, but each was inspiring

VOL. 8, NO. 8

FARADAY'S CONTRIBUTIONS

1497

1498


Aucuw, 1931

to Faraday because they marked the beginning of a long series of lectures and papers which place him high among the makers of chemistry. About this time Davy began to relinquish active experimental work, and Brande slowly slipped into scientific insignificance. But Faraday forged rapidly ahead. His position in the Royal Institution was strengthened in 1820, again in 1821-the year of his mamage, and made secure in 1825, when, upon the recommendation of Davy, he was appointed Director of the Laboratories. At the same time he was relieved of some minor duties so that he could devote his time to research. For about seven years Faraday had served as an assistant, but now his apprenticeship was over. He had won his freedom and could work untrammeled as his genius impelled. Moreover, he was encouraged to investigate and publish because early in 1824 he had been elected a Fellow of the Royal Society. Doubtless he felt that other learned societies would soon honor him, as indeed several did within a few years. During the preceding five years and within the following five, Faraday made fundamental contributions to chemistry; e. g., the discovery of benzene (CaHs), the liquefaction of gases, optical glass, and alloys of steel. These will soon be discussed in detail. During this period he performed experiments in electricity and magnetism which culminated in 1831 in his epochal discovery that electricity can be derived from magnetism. In 1833John Fuller, a member of the Royal Institution, founded the Fullerian Professorship of Chemistry and Faraday was appointed to this position for life. Thus within twenty years Faraday had risen from a menial position to the highest place in the Royal Institution. And it was during this double decade that Faraday made most of his contributions to chemistry. Faraday's early contributions to chemistry were published in the Quarterly Journal of Science. Soon after the Royal Institution was launched, a journal was issued containing papers by members of the scientific staff and others. It will be recalled that part of Davy's long title was Assistant Editor of the Journals of the Institution. In a book issued by the Institution in 1802 (the earliest I have found) Davy's name appears on the title page as Joint Editor of the Journals together with Young's. But apparently a journal on a large scale and issued as the official organ of the Royal Institution did not appear until 1816. This is the Quarterly Journal, as it is usually called, and was continued until it was superseded by the Proceedings of the Royal Institution. The early volumes of the Journal were nominally edited by William T. Brande, who was professor of chemistry a t that time, though Faraday helped him and doubtless did much of the work; in fact a t times, according to certain correspondence, he did all of the editing. The Quarterly Journal contains many articles on chemistry by Faraday from 1816 to 1826. The first, as already stated, was the one on the analysis

VOL. 8, NO. 8


1499

of native caustic lime. This article is in Volume I and, strictly speaking, was "sent in" by Faraday and incorporated in a series of short communications by Davy. I t is not included in the Table of Contents, though i t is in the Index. However, it is credited to Mr. Faraday, Assistant in the Laboratory of the Royal Institution, and was supplemented by some "Observations" by Davy. Upward of thirty articles followed regularly during the next ten years, and with few exceptions they were on some chemical investigations conducted by Faraday. We cannot enumerate all these contributions. The following, however, should be cited (with abbreviated titles): Escape of Gases through Capillary Tubes (two articles) Solution of Silver in Ammonia Sulphuret of Phosphorus Combinations of Ammonia with Chlorides On Sirium (two articles on a "New Element") Gallic Add and Tannin Separation of Iron and Manganese Analysis of Indian Steel Decomposition of Chlorides by Silver, Hydrogen, and Zinc Carburetted Hydrogen

Combustion of Diamond Nitrous Oxide Alloys of Steel Carbon Chlorides Change of Vegetable Colors Hydrate of Chlorine Action of Gunpowder on Lead Liquefaction of Gases Fluid Chlorine Fumigation Tests for Nitrogen (minute quantities) Tubes for Storing Scarce Fluids Crystals of Lead Chromate

Faraday's first long investigation was on alloys of steel. It was begun in 1820 in collaboration with a surgical instrument maker named Stodart, and was continued about two years. The primary object was to make modifications, or alloys, of steel suitable for surgical instruments, though the field widened as the work progressed. Faraday hoped a non-rusting alloy might he made by alloying steel with certain metals, e. g., silver, platinum and its congeners, or nickel. But the nickel steel he made was found to be more readily oxidized than ordinary steel. The platinum steel, too, did not possess the desired properties. Silver steel proved more promising, though only a small percentage of silver could be incorporated in the alloy. The alloys of steel with iridium and rhodium were likewise disappointing. The research as a whole was not profitable as far as the primary object was concerned. Only a few applications were the net result. Silver steel was used for a time by a manufacturer of fireplace fittings, and some of the other steels were made into razor blades, which were reported "to cut well." Faraday saved some of these blades and in later years would occasionally present a friend with a razor made from his own special steelan alloy of steel and rhodium. This research is sometimes referred to as "two years wasted." Faraday

1500

JOURNAL O F CHEMICAL EDUCATION

Aucusr, 1931

may have been of this opinion a t the conclusion of the work, because he wrote G. de la Rive thus: Pray pity us that, after two years' experiments, we have got no further; but I am sure, if you knew the labour of the experiments, you would applaud us for our perseverance a t least.

Looking back over this research and appraising it properly, we cannot agree that i t was "two years wasted.'' Consider some of the positive results. First, Faraday demonstrated that small proportions of metals produce surprising effects in the properties of steel-now a fact of wide industrial application. Had other metals, 2 . g., cobalt, tungsten, chromium, and molybdenum been available, Faraday would doubtless have anticipated the vast field of special steels and perhaps may have attained his primary object-a non-corrosive or stainless steel for use in surgical instruments, cutlery, and tools. Second, Faraday acquired skill as a manipulator and experience as an investigator. In 1820 he was still a beginner in many respects, and the discoveries during the next five years demonstrate unequivocally that during this intensive work on steel alloys Faraday learned how to plan' and conduct a research. Hitherto he had been a promiscuous prober. Now he was an investigator seeking persistently the solution of large problems. Third, he discovered several facts about metals in the course of the investigation, e. g., the easy volatilization of silver, the difficulty in reducing titanium compounds to the metal, the reticulated surface of an etched alloy of steel and aluminum, and many properties of alloys now commonplace but then unusual. Fourth, he learned a great deal about furnaces, crucibles, clays, and metals in general. So while we must concede that the research did not yield positive results to industry, we must conclude that the research was fruitful for Faraday by contributing factors which by assimilation helped him in his future investigations. Indeed, Faraday realized he had gained something intangible, because he slips this sentence into a paragraph toward the end of his descriptive letter to G. de la Rive: We are still encouraged to go an, and think that the experience we have gained will shorten our future labours.

During this work on steel alloys Faraday made a contribution to chemistry which is often overlooked, viz., the formation of graphite from charcoal. Let us hear his own story (slightly condensed): Whilst making the carburet above mentioned [alloy of iron, aluminum, and carbon], we also succeeded in forming plumbago; but I am afraid this artificial production of it will not be very useful in its application. If iron be heated highly, and long enough, in contact with charcoal, plumbago is always formed. I have some buttons of metal here, weighing two or three ounces, that appear to be solid plumbago. The appearance, however, is deceitful, for it is only an the surface, and to thedepth perhaps of ' / d b of an

VOL. 8, No. 8


l%Il

1502


Aucusr, 1931

inch, that the plumbago has been formed. The internal part is composed of the crystalline carhuret before mentioned. What is plumbago is very gaod, and marks excellently well; and though we have never yet been able to fuse powdered plumbago into a mass, yet I think, if it were required to form it in a compact state to work up into pencils, it might be done by imbedding plates of iron about '/& of an inch thick in charcoal, and heating intensely for a long time. This we have not yet had time to try, but intend to do so.

The next systematic contribution to chemistry made by Faraday was on the liquefaction of chlorine and several other gases. His account of this work was embodied in two p a p e r s W O nFluid Chlorine" and on the "Condensation of Several Gases into Liquidsn-which were read before the Royal Society in 1823 (p. 1501). It will be recalled that Davy had shown in 1810 that the substance hitherto called oxymuriatic acid was not a compound but a simple substanceand he gave the name chlorine to the element. Davy also showed that the solid prepared by Berthollet and called by him solid chlorine was really chlorine hydrate (Clr8HeO). It was natural that Faraday who was closely associated with Davy should likewise be interested in chlorine, particularly in view of the hazy knowledge of the element. During his spare time Faraday did original work of his own choice. Probably his natural dislike of "doubtful knowledge" led him to re-examine chlorine hydrate. He analyzed it and the results were published in the Quarterly Journal. Davy, without stating the results he thought might follow, suggested that the hydrate be heated under pressure in a sealed glass tube. Paraday did so. As a result the tube became filled with a greenyellow gas, which on cooling separated into two liquids. Faraday found one to be water, and the other chlorine. Therefore what had happened was that the water and chlorine had separated, and the chlorine gas not being able to escape had condensed into the liquid form.:' To prove that the oily liquid was really chlorine and contained no w&@r,Faraday put dried chlorine into a tube, cooled it to a low temperature, and obtained liquid chlorine. A curious-perhaps not entirely a u t h e n t i ~ t o r yis told about this research by Dr. Paris, a friend and biographer of Davy, who happened to visit the laboratory while Faraday was a t work. Seeing the oily liquid in the tubes Dr. Paris scolded the young assistant for carelessness in using greasy apparatus. Later in the day when Faraday filed off the end of a tube, the contents suddenly exploded and the oily liquid completely disappeared. Faraday a t once realized that the liquid had volatilized with violence when the tube was opened. So, early the next day Dr. Paris received the following laconic note: Dear Sir: The OIL you noticed yesterday turns out to be liquid chlorine. Yours faithfully, M. FARADAY

VOL.8, NO. 8


1503

In a letter written March 24, 1823, to his friend G. de la Rive, Faraday concludes a lively story of his liquefaction of chlorine by these wordsI hope t o be able to reduce many other gases to the liquid form.

This hope was soon realized. Grasping the significance of the liquefaction of chlorine, Faraday continued this line of work and succeeded in liquefying sulfurous acid (SO%),hydrogen sulfide (HzS), carbon dioxide, euchlorine (a gas obtained from potassium chlorate and sulfuric acid), nitrous oxide (NpO), cyanogen [(CN)J, ammonia, and hydrochloric acid (HC1)the last a repetition of Davy's experiment. In these experiments he used a simple and ingenious apparatus. He condensed the gas in a closed tube, bent a t about a right angle, like the one he had used for chlorine. The end of the tube which contained the substance was heated while the other end was cooled. Besides showing the liquefaction of the gases, Faraday also determined a number of physical constants of the liquids. His attempts to liquefy hydrogen, oxygen, and some other gases were unsuccessful. Soon after Faraday's paper was published his attention was called to the fact that his work on the liquefaction of gases had been anticipated. He a t once (1824) admitted the priority of others in a frank article. It should be emphasized, however, that while isolated experiments on the liquefaction of gases were made by different chemists prior t o Faraday's work, Faraday deserves credit for the first systematic work in this field. Furthermore, it should be noted that Faraday does not use the word "discoveries" in his article nor does he anywhere claim priority. He states that these experiments (after the one on chlorine) were continued a t the request of Davy and were done under his general direction. Faraday's first work on the liquefaction of gases was interrupted by an excessive number of experiments, lectures, and administrative duties, and it was not until 1845 that he published an account of a secondseries of experiments (p. 1504) (Alembic Club Reprints, No. 12). As in the early experiments, the gases were condensed by the simultaneous effects of high pressure and low temperature. But Faraday had become an expert manipulator during the interval, and the experiments were done with much skill, though the apparatus was still simple compared with the complicated, ponderous contrivances of other workers in this field. The pressure was obtained by two air pumps, though in certain cases he utilized the pressure exerted by the gases when generated in closed, strong, glass vessels. The low temperature was produced by allowing Thilorier's mixture of carbon dioxide and ether to evaporate under reduced pressure. By these devices he could obtain a pressure as high as fifty atmospheres and a temperature as low as -166°F. The gases were condensed in tubes (see page 1505) made of green bottle glass, from '/sth to '/dh of an inch in external diameter, and from 1/42ndto 'both of an inch in thickness. He says:

1504


Aucvsr, 1931

VOL. 8, NO. 8


1505

They were chiefly of two kinds, about eleven and nine inches in length; the one, when horizontal, having a curve downward near one end t o dip into the cold bath, and the other, being in form like an inverted siphon, could have the bend cooled in the same manner when necessary. Into the straight part of the horizontal tube, and the longest leg of the siphon tube, pressure gauges were introduced when required. Caps, stopcocks, and connecting pieces were employed t o attach the glass tubes to the pumps, and these, being of brass, were of the usual character of those employed for operations with gas, except that they were small and carefully made.

With this apparatus and by this method, which proved very effectual, Faraday obtained these results: olefiant gasliquefied; hydriodic acid and hydrobromic acid-liquefied and solidified; fluosilicon-liquefied; phosphine, arsine, fluoboron-liquefied; muriatic acid-liquefied; sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide-liquefied and solidified; euchlorine, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, cyanogen, and nitrous oxide--liquefied and solidified. He could not solidify (at a temperature of -166°F.) chlorine, ether, alco-

hol, and carbon disulfide, nor liquefy hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, nitric oxide, carbon monoxide, and coal gas. He definitely predicted that a t sufficiently low temperatures the latter group of gases-the so-called "permanent" gases-would pass into the liquid and solid states. Many elaborate observations were made, and Faraday with that keenness characteristic of a genuine investigator actually anticipated the results of later workers on critical constants by stating in substance that unless a given gas is below a certain temperature, it is not likely that any increase in pressure, except perhaps one exceedingly great, would convert the gas into a liquid. Furthermore he ascribes his failure to liquefy hydrogen to the fact that the -llO°F. he reached "is probably above this point of temperature for hydrogen." The next conspicuous work of Faraday resulted in the discovery of the two hydrocarbons, benzene (CeHs), and butylene (CaHs) o- and pdichlorobenzene, nitrobenzene, and chlorine derivatives of butylene. This

1506


AUGUST,1931

VOL. 8, NO. 8


1507

composite discovery was described in a paper read by Faraday on June 16, 1825, a t a meeting of the Royal Society (p. 1506). The raw material from which Faraday separated benzene was an oil obtained as a by-product in the manufacture of an illuminating gas by the destructive distillation of fish oil. Several years prior to 1825 the Portable Gas Company of London manufactured this illuminating gas by dropping whale, or cod, oil into a hot furnace, subjecting the gaseous product to a pressure of about thirty atmospheres, and storing the purified gas in portable vessels for use in public buildings and private houses. During the compression an oily liquid was deposited. It was from this liquid that Faraday obtained benzene and butylene. He soon found that this oil was a mixture, and decided to subject i t to fractional distillation. Thus he says: With the hope of separating some distinct substances from this evident mixture, a quantity of it was distilled, and the vapows condensed a t a temperature of O 0 into separate portions, the receiver being changed with each rise of 10" in the retort and the liquid retained in a state of incipient ebullition. I n this way a succession of products was obtained; but they were by no means constant; for the portions, for instance, which came over wben the fluid was boiling from 160' to 170", wben redistilled, began to boil a t 130", and a part remained which did not rise under 200". By repeatedly rectifying all these portions, and adding similar products together, I was able to diminish these differences of temperature, and a t last hring them more nearly to resemble a series of substances of different volatility.

The next step is significant. Continuing, he says: During these operations I had occasion to remark, that the boiling point was more constant at, or between, 176' and 190" than a t any other temperature: large quantities of fluid distilling over without any change in the degree; whilst in other parts of the series it was constantly rising. This induced me to search in the products obtained between these points for some definite substance, and I ultimately succeeded in separating a new compound of carbon and hydrogen, which I may hy anticipation distinguish as hicarburet of hydrogen.

If we substitute for "bi-carburet of hydrogen" the modem term, benzene (introduced by Laurent in 1834), we have in this last sentence the first words announcing the discovery of this fundamental compound. Faraday separated his bi-carburet of hydrogen by freezing i t out from the fraction boiling a t 176-190°F. Next he found the physical constants, and the values he obtained are remarkably close to those accepted today. The account of his study of the chemical properties is impressive. He noted that it bums with a bright flame and much smoke, forms an explosive mixture with oxygen, gradually deposits carbon, and yields carbureted hydrogen gas when passed through a red-hot tube, and is inactive toward iodine, potassium, and alkalies. A specimen of the benzene prepared by Faraday is preserved in the museum of the Royal Institution.

1508


Auous~.1931

Regarding the action with chlorine, he says: Chlorine introduced t o the substance in a retort exerted but little action until placed in sunlight, when dense fumes were formed without the evolution of much heat; and ultimately much muriatic acid was prodnced, and two other substances, one a solid crystalline body, the other a dense thick fluid. It was found by further examination, that neither of these was soluble in water; that both were soluble in alcohol-the liquid readily, the solid with more dificulty.

The solid was undoubtedly p-dichlorobenzene and the liquid the ortho-isomer, but he did not examine them, merely saying, "I reserve the consideration of these, and of similar compounds, to another opportunity." In this connection we should not overlook the fact that as early as 1821 Faraday had described and analyzed a compound of carbon and chlorine which was subsequently shown by Hugo Miiller to be hexachlorobenzene (CeCle); that is, by a curious reversion Faraday had in his hands, so to speak, a chlorine derivative of benzene four years before he discovered benzene itself or studied the action of the two reactants upon each other. Regarding the action with nitric acid and sulfuric acid, he says: Nitric acid acted slowly upon the substance and became red, the fluid remaining colourlesr. When cooled to 3Z0, the substance became solid and of a fine red d o u r , which disappeared upon fusion. The odour of the substance with the acid was exceedingly like that of almonds, and it is probable that hydrocyanic acid was formed. When washed with water, i t appeared to have undergone little or no change. Sulphuric acid added to it over mercury exerted a moderate action upon it, little or no heat was evolved, no blackening took place, no sulphurous acid was formed; but the acid became of a light yellow colour, and a portion of a clear colourless fluid floated, which appeared to be a product of the action. When separated, i t was found to be bright and clear, hut not affected by water or more sulphuric acid, solidifying a t about 34". and heing then white, crystalline, and dendritical. The substance was lighter than water, soluble in alcohol, the solution being precipitated by a small quantity of water, hut becoming clear by great excess.

The mono-nitrobenzene was not studied in detail, but the action with sulfuric acid excited Faraday's interest and was subsequently investigated. He determined the composition of the bi-carburet of hydrogen by passing the vapor over copper oxide and also by detonating a mixture of the vapor and oxygen. The results of the two methods were concordant and from them Faraday concluded the substance was a binary compound containing "two proportionals of carbon and one of hydrogen." This conclusion led Faraday to call the compound bi-carburet of hydrogen and give it the formula G H . But these are not benzene and CeHe! The name benzene, as already stated, was not introduced until 1834. At the time Faraday made his discovery (1825) the proportional weight assigned to carbon was approximately 6. If the proportional weight of carbon had been 12 (as it is now) Faraday would have expressed his result as one proportional weight each of

VOL. 8. NO. 8


1509

carbon and hydrogen, and the formula would have been CH, i. e., what we now designate as the simplest formula. In 1825 the whole subject of atoms and molecules, as well as the relation of atomic weights to molecular weights, was obscure, indeed molecular formulas were unknown. Hence Faraday did not understand the significance of the value 39 he obtained for the vapor density. If he had, he would have written the molecular formula. Translated into modem terms, the value of the specific gravity obtained by Faraday-39 to hydrogen 1-becomes 78 on the Hz basis, and his simplest formula CH gives the molecular formula CaH6. The second hydrocarbon obtained from the oil was called a "new carburet of hydrogen." He isolated it by heating the oil gently and passing the vapor through a tube cooled to 0' F. As before, he studied the properties and obtained results in agreement with modem observations. The properties differed from those of his bi-carburet of hydrogen, particularly the specific gravity which was between 27 and 28, as compared with 39 for the bi-carburet. He also found the composition by the detonation method to be four proportionals each of carbon and hydrogen. The result, according to Faraday, would give the specific gravity 28 [i. e., (4 X 6) (4 X 11 = 281, which agreed with his experimental value, and the formula C4H4. As in the analogous case of benzene, Faraday's formula becomes CzH4 according to analysis and CPH8according to its vapor density [i.e., (4 X 12) (8 X 1) = 2 X 28 = 561. Going back just a little, we note that Faraday was astonished by the facts that his new carburet of hydrogen, I, contained carbon and hydrogen in the same proportion as olefiant gas (CH,, old formula, and GH,, new formula), but I1 had twice its density. He studied the action of chlorine on the new carburet and found that, like olefiant gas, it combined with an equal volume of chlorine and produced a compound of carbon, hydrogen, and chlorine different from the corresponding compound obtained from olefiant gas. He says,

+

+

This is a remarkable circumstance and assists in showing that though the elements are the same, and in the same proportions as in olrfiant gas, they are in a very different state of combination.

Faraday sagely remarks toward the end of his paper: In reference to the existence of bodies composed of the same elementq and in the same praportions, but di5ering in their qualities, it may be observed that now we are taught to look for them, they will probably multiply upon us.

In 1824 Faraday was placed on a committee appointed by the Royal Society to improve the glass used for optical instruments, especially telescopes. Within a year the actual work of investigation was assigned t o a subcommittee of three, Faraday, Dollond (the optician and instrument maker), and Herschel (afterward Sir John). Faraday was entrusted with the

1510


AUGUST.1931

chemical part, including the experimental manufacture of the glass, Dollond with the grinding of the lenses, and Herschel with the examination of the physical properties of the finished product. Faraday attacked the problem with zeal. After preliminary experiments, furnaces were built in a special room a t the Royal Institution and an assistant was hired to "keep the furnaces always a t the same heat." The goal was a "heavy glassH-a lead boro-silicate, and the arduous attempt to make a better optical glass of this type was conducted for five years. In 1829 the results were communicated by Faraday to the Royal Society in his Bakerian lecture of that year-a long memoir which took three sittings for its delivery. In 1830 the experiments on glass-making were stopped. The next year the larger Committee reported to the Council of the Royal Society that the telescope made of Faraday's glass

. . . .bears as great a power as can reasonably be expected, and is very achromatic. The Committee therefore recommend that Mr. Faraday be requested to make a perfect piece of glass of the largest size that his present apparatus willadmit, and also to teach some person to manufacture the glass for general sale. Faraday declined in respectful terms to continue the work. The research on optical glass was a failure, as far as it concerned the original hope of improvements in telescopes. Nevertheless the glass was used in spectroscopes and microscopes and provided Faraday with a glass which subsequently became indispensable in his diamagnetic and magnetooptical researches. In his paper "On the Mutual Action of Sulphuric Acid and Naphthaline," read before the Royal Society, Febrnary 16, 1826, and published in the Philosophical Transactions of the same year, Faraday gives a detailed account of his discovery of "a new a c i d and the preparation of fifteen of its salts (p. 1511). He named the acid "sulphonaphthalic" acid. As a matter of fact Faraday had actually prepared the two isomeric naphthalene mono-sulfonic acids, though he did not distinguish the isomers from each other. In his original paper he says: When concentrated sulphuric acid and naphthaline are brought into contact at common, or moderately elevated temperatures, a peculiar compound of sulphuric acid with the elements of naphthaline is produced, which has acid properties.

After purifying the "peculiar compound," studying its properties, and preparing its potassium salt, he says: I t was now evident that an acid has been formed peculiar in its nature, and producing with bases peculiar salts.

He next prepared the barium salt and decomposed i t by careful addition of sulfuric acid ("no excess of sulphuric acid being permitted) into barium

VOL.8, NO. 8


1511

TWLEPAGEor. A REPRINT OF FARADAY'S PAPERIN WHICH THE DISCOVERY OF THE Two ISOMERIC NAPHTHALENE MONO-SULBONIC ACIDSIS DESCRIBED

1512


Aucusr, 1931

sulfate and a pure aqueous solution of the peculiar acid. Having isolated the acid, he proceeded to study its properties carefully-reaction with litmus, crystallization by slow evaporation and by dehydration over sulfuric acid in vacuo, taste, melting point, decomposition by heating, and then says: These facts establish the peculiarity of this acid, and distinguish it from all others.

From the acid he prepared fifteen salts-potassium, sodium, ammonium, barium, strontium, calcium, magnesium, iron, zinc, lead, manganese, copper, nickel, silver, and mercury. He gives a detailed statement of the properties of these salts. Finally he analyzed the acid and the barium salt, the latter being chosen because he says this salt:

..

. .was found to be very constant in composition, could he obtained anhydrous at moderate temperatures, and yet sustained a high temperature hefore it suffered any change. Faraday used the combining, or equivalent weights, accepted a t that time (1825) and stated his results in "proportionals." Hence his figures are not easy to translate into the values used today. However, a critical examination of his analytical methods and arithmetical results made by my colleague, Dr. J. Philip Mason, shows that the analysis agrees with the cornposition of naphthalene mono-sulfonic acid, and proves that Faraday discovered this acid and many of its salts. Faraday discovered several chlorides of carbon. In 1820 he isolated a compound which was undoubtedly hexachlorohenzene. The next year he published an article giving an account of the discovery of two chlorine derivatives of ethylene. By treating Dutch liquid (ethylene chloride, C2H4Cb)with chlorine in the sunlight, he obtained a white, crystalline substance, which he showed by analysis was a chloride of carbon free from hydrogen. This compound was obviously formed by replacing the hydrogen by chlorine, thus (in our formulas):

+

C2H4C12 4C12 =

GCl

+ 4HCI

Faraday called this compound "perchloride of carhon." Later it was called "etherosic chloride" or "carhon sesquichloride." It is our hexachloroethane (C2C16). Shortly afterward, by passing the perchloride through a hot tube he obtained a liquid which he called "protochloride of carbon." It proved to be a compound of carbon and chlorine hut in different proportions from the first one, and it also had a different specific gravity. In the first compound the proportionals of carhon to chlorine were 2 to 3 and in the second 1 to 1. These give in his formulation CPCLand CC1. Translated into our formulas these become GC16 and CzC4. The next year (1822) he published an account of an examination, jointly with Phillips, of a compound prepared by another chemist, in which it appeared that a third

VOL. 8, NO. 8


1513

chloride of carbon exists, having 2 proportionals of carbon and 1 of chlorine. In his formulation, the expression would be GC1, which would become C2Clz in our formulation, though we cannot assign the correct molecular formula because of insufficient data. In his account of the discovery of two new compounds of carbon and hydrogen published in 1825, he mentions the isolation of two chlorine derivatives of bi-carburet of hydrogen, which were undoubtedly a- and fi-dichlorobenzene. Toward the end of the paper he states that chlorine combines with the new carburet of hydrogen, volume for volume. That is, butylene-our name for his new carburet of hydrogen-united with chlorine to form butylene dichloride, thus: CIHn

+ CI1 = CIHsClz

Faraday did not name this chlorine compound. While working on the chlorination of ethylene, Faraday discovered a new iodine compound. By treating olefiant gas with iodine in the sunlight, a white crystalline solid was obtained. He showed a little later that it contained 1 proportional of iodine and 2 of olefiant gas and concluded i t was analogous to the compound of chlorine and olefiant gas. That is, in our nomenclature it would be CZHIL. He did not name this substance. In appraising these discoveries of the halogen derivatives of hydrocarbons, we should remember the compounds were studied several years before accurate and reliable analytical methods were available and upward of forty years before atomic and molecular weights were clearly differentiated and understood. This work as a whole is indisputable evidence of Faraday's ability as a chemist. One of Faraday's major contributions to chemistry was the set of facts which led to the law bearing his name, the law connecting the amount of electricity involved in quantitative electrochemical changes. Faraday's first commonplace book indicates that he was interested in experimental electricity about the time he began to work a t the Royal Institution, and his early notebooks reveal his profound grasp of the fundamental questions provoked about that time by the baffling field of electricity and magnetism. Moreover, he was the institutional heir to Davy's discoveries of the fundamental relation between current electricity and chemical change. The isolation of sodium and potassium from their bases by the action of a current from the big battery of the Royal Institution had been accomplished only ten years before on the very spot where Faraday worked and reflected. While i t is a fact that from 1816 to 1826 his major field of interest was chemistry, i t is likewise true that during this period he attacked the alluring field of electricity and magnetism. His early published articles on electricity are few but his notes are extensive. We find in his notebooks and letters many stray entries hinting a t his eagerness to abandon the tedi-

1514


A u c u s ~ ,1931

ous, time-consuming researches on steel and glass in order to follow up promising experiments in magnetism and electricity. It is generally known that these experiments reached a peak in 1831, when Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction, and thereby made possible the invention of the induction coil and the electromagnetic machines that led to the invention of the modem dynamo. Let us consider this discovery briefly. An electric current is generated by moving a magnet into and out of a coil of wire. The crucial part of this discovery was recorded in his notebook as having been made on October 17,1831, though he had been working several months on the problem. He then describes as follows the discovery of the production of electricity by the approximation (bringing near) of a magnet to a wire: A cylindrical bar magnet of an inch in diameter, and eight inches and a half in length, had one end just inserted into the end of the helix cylinder (220 feet long): then it was quickly thrust in to the whole length, and the galvanometer needle moved; then pulled out, and again the needle moved, but in the opposite direction. The effect was repeated every time the magnet was put in or out, and, therefore, a wave of electricity was so produced from mere approximation of a magnet, and not from its formation in silu.

From this time (1831) on t o the end of his life Faraday continued his experiments on magnetism and electricity, thereby enriching science in numberless ways and contributing incalculably to the progress, comfort, and happiness of all peoples. Faraday's contribution to chemistry alluded to above, viz., that electrochemical decomposition is capable of mathematical formulation, has peculiar significance. Faraday was not a mathematician. He was an experimentalist. Results of countless experiments are recorded in his notebooks with scarcely an interpretive number. Hence this discovery, which is known as Faraday's law and has today its original validity, stands out in a striking way. Going back a little, we find that Faraday by 1832 had exploded the notion of different kinds of electricity-an unfortunate and misleading error inherited by him. That is, he showed by experiment the identity of electricity-static or galvanic-whatever the source. This work led him to investigate the conducting power of fused solids and then on t o a closer study of electrochemical decomposition in general. In this larger field he entered into speculations about the nature of electricity and the mechanism of electrochemical decomposition. This digression was not a misfortune because he aroused the interest of his friend Whewell, who suggested the need of specific terms to express the facts, or a t least to describe the apparatus and the process. Part of the correspondence between Faraday and Whewell on this matter has been lost, but two letters remain which show that Whewell proposed the terms, and that Faraday expressed his willingness to adopt them. The terms finally adopted by Faraday (May,

FARADAY LECTURING AT ONE OR

THE

CHRISTMAS LECTURES FOR CHILDREN

1516


AUGUST, 1931

1834) were electrode for the old term pole, anode for the positive, and cathode for the negative pole, respectively, ion for the electrified particle, anion for the negative ion, and cation (also spelled cathion) for the positive ion. He also adopted the terms electrolyte for the decomposable substance and electrolysis for the decomposing process. Most of these terms are included in a sketch made by Faraday in his own hound volume of the Experimental Researches (see illustration below). These terms were not used slavishly by Faraday, lest he might be misled into ideas about an electric current which would hamper his conclusions. His next step was to construct an instrument to measure the current and he finally perfected a form of electrolytic cell ever since known as a voltameter, a form "in which water is decomposed, the quantity of electricity which has flowed through it being measured by the quantity of the gas or gases evolved during the operation." Having a reliable standard, Faraday next investigated "cases of decom-

position by an electric current" as he called them. He conducted a long series of experiments in which many different substances were subjected to the action of a current. In these experiments he compared the qnantities of the materials formed (as gases or deposits) with the quantities of hydrogen liberated in the standard voltameter. In all cases he found that these quantities were proportional to the numbers called a t that time the equivalent weights of the substances. Thus, referring to the numbers and substances, he says: I have proposed to call the numbers representing the proportions in which they [the substances] are evolved electro-~hernicel equivalents. Thus, hydrogen, oxygen, chlorine, iodine, lead, tin are ions; the four fonner are anions, the two metals cations, and 1, 8, 36, 125, 104. 58 are their electro-chemical equivalents nearly.

It was hoped by Faraday's contemporaries that his method of determining electrochemical equivalents would solve the perplexing problem of choosing the correct atomic weights, but the hope was not realized owing to confusion in the use of the terms atom and molecule and especially to

VOL.8. NO. 8


'

1517

ignorance of the number of atoms in the molecules of compounds. This difficulty was not cleared up until about 1860. This investigation also showed one other f a d , viz., the quantity of electricity needed for the liheration of the electrochemical equivalents is independent of the time. Put into definite f o r m a s Faraday's law-his results might be stated thus: A definite weight of an element or a radical is liberated when a fixed quantity of electricity passes through a solution. The definite weight is the equivalent weight of the element or the radical and the fixed quantity of electricity is the faraday (equal to 96,500 coulombs). This law is a t the basis of the electrochemicalindustries which involveelectrolysis. Hence it is a major contribution of Faraday to chemistry. Toward the end of his life Faraday worked on colloidal gold. In 1856 he gave a lecture a t the Royal Institution which included "some observations on finely divided gold." His Bakerian lecture of this same year was on "The Optical Properties of Precipitated Gold." He supplemented these two contributions by a third lecture in 1857. Colloidal gold had been the subject of much chemical investigation. As early as 1802 J. B. Richter found and proved that it consisted of minute particles of metallic gold. This result was later independently demonstrated by Berzelius and Liehig. In his paper "On the Experimental Relations of Gold (and Other Metals) to Light" (Phil. Trans., 1857, p. 145), Faraday says: The latter [colloidal solutions of gold] have all the appearance of solutions. But they never are such, containing in fact no dissolved, but only diffused gold. The particles are easily rendered evident, by gathering the rays of the sun (or a lamp) into a cone by a lens, and sending the part of the cone near the focus into the fluid; the cone becomes visible, and though the illuminated particles cannot be distinguished because of their minuteness, yet the light they reflect is golden in character, and seems to be abundant in proportion t o the quantity of solid gold present. The state of division of these particles must be extreme; they have not as yet been seen by any power of the micrascope. I believe the purple of Cassius to be essentially finely divided gold, associated with more or less of oxide of tin.

Faraday was among the first, perhaps the first, to record the discovery of the protective action of gelatin. He showed that the addition of gelatin to his "gold solution" made it so stable that it was possible to evaporate portions to dryness without change in color. A specimen of Faraday's "gold solution" is preserved in the Royal Institution. Faraday published only one hook in chemistry, though his name appears on the title page of two others. In his commonplace book of 1820 there is an entry which shows he was contemplating the publication of a hook on chemical manipulation. At this time Faraday realized keenly that success in experimental work was measured by manipulative skill. The entry includes the phrases "Lessons in Chemistry," "Processes for


AUGUST,

Manipulation." This brief entry is the germ of a book which Faraday thought about for several years. In February and May, 1827, he gave a course of twelve lectures a t the Royal Institution on "The Philosophy and Practice of Chemical Manipulation." Later in the year he published his book on "Chemical Manipulation." Faraday said in the preface: The object of this book is to facilitate t o the young chemist the acquirement of manipulation, and, by consequence, his progress in the science itself. I t does not attempt to inculcate the principles of the science, but the practice; neither does it claim to teach a habit of reasoning, but has solely in view the art of experimenting.

VOL. 8, NO. 8


1519

The book includes an inspiring treatment of these topics: The conveniences and requisities of a laboratory. General chemical apparatus and its uses. The methods of performing chemical operations. The facilities acquired by practice. The causes which make experiments fail or succeed.

This hook was for many years an indispensable aid to chemists. A second edition appeared in 1830, and a third in 1842. He refused to bring out a later edition; although, somewhat obsolete, i t would have continued to he helpful. It is today a mine of information about manipulation. The second hook referred to is Faraday's "Chemical History of a Candle," which will he discussed presently. The third is Faraday's "Experimental Researches." This is not a new book, being a collection of his papers published in various journals. The first of the large folio volumes starts in 1831 with paragraph 1, and goes on, through four volumes, to paragraph 15,997 in 1859. The three volumes on electricity were published in 1839, 1844, and 1855. The fourth volume, on chemistry and physics, which contains also the most important of his earlier papers, was published in 1859. Faraday's salary a t the Royal Institution was always meager, and a t times he was induced to do commercial work, consulting, and expert advising. But he did not enjoy the work of a consulting chemist. The few public experiences he had as an expert witness were mortifying and distasteful. While he was willing to help in any way possible, he really avoided appearing in public as a chemist. His only extended service as a scientific advisor was given to Trinity House, a service which began in 1836 and lasted until 1865. He declined to accept a title and left the amount of remuneration to the authorities, saying

. . . .the sum, therefore, of £200 is quite enough in itself, but not if it is to be the indicator of the character of the appointment. The position which I presume you would wish me to hold is analogous to that of a standing counsel. Faraday retained this position for nearly thirty years and advised Trinity House on all chemical and other scientific suggestions and inventions connected with lighthouses or buoys-not for personal gain or renown but for the public good. In his own words "I am simply an advisor upon philosophical questions and am put into action only when called upon." It is pleasant to note that when Faraday relinquished this work the authorities of Trinity House continued to pay him £200 a year for the rest of hislife. A discussion of Faraday's contributions to chemistry should not be limited to the discovery and study of compounds. He was a superb lecturer and during forty years delivered hundreds of lectures, mainly in chemistry. Soon after his return (1815) from the continental tour with Davy, he re-

1520


Aucusr, 1931

newed his association with the City Philosophical Society and frequently gave lectures at its meetings during the next two years (1816-18). These lectures were carefully prepared expositions of the properties of the elements and their important compounds, as well as of the general aspects of physical science. These series of lectures not only gave Faraday an excellent opportunity to extend his own knowledge of chemistry, acquire skill in manipulation before an audience, and improve ability to express his thoughts in good English, but it also opened wide the door of friendship which was never closed by Faraday throughout his long life. In his last lecture he says: I retire gratified by the considerations that every lecture has tended to draw closer the ties of friendship and good feeling between the members of the Society and myself.

In 1829 Faraday was appointed Lecturer in Chemistry at the Royal Naval Academy a t Woolwich. Here he gave twenty lectures annually for twenty years. He went to the Academy once a week, and prepared his lecture and experiments in the afternoon or evening preceding his lecture, which was delivered early the following morning. No man was so respected, admired, and beloved as a teacher at the Military Academy in former days as Faraday." His main aim was to impart a taste for chemistry and give them as much information as youths of this type could assimilate. He says in a letter to his successor: '6

I war ever very kindly received there, and that proof of regard which one must ever feel in concluding a long engagement would be in some degree lessened with me by

seeing that you had reason to be satisfied with your duties and their acceptance.

Faraday declined numerous requests for courses of lectures. Many of these had to be set aside in view of his extended duties at the Royal Institution. In passing it should be noted that in 1827 he declined the professorship of chemistry at London University (later University College and now a part of the University of London). Faraday's lectures a t the Royal Institution began in 1825 immediately after he was appointed to the responsible position of Director of the Laboratories. I t will be recalled that Davy's lectures started shortly after his appointment in 1801 and continued till he was obliged to resign on account of ill health. Brande succeeded Davy as lecturer. Faraday was a lecture assistant to both Davy and Brande. Hence Faraday was thoroughly informed about the kind of lectures the audiences had heard, and doubtless he had seen ways in which lectures at the Royal Institution could be extended or modified in accordance with the plans of founders of the Institution. He surely must have given this matter careful thought because one of his first acts after his appointment as Director in 1825 was to initiate evening meetings of the members for the discussion of scientific subjects,

VOL.8, NO. 8


1.521

first in the laboratory and later in the lecture room. These meetings became so popular they were organized by Faraday into Friday evening lectures, which have been given ever since. He also originated the annual Christmas lectures for young people, fostered this feature, and made it into a delightful annual event. The first series (six lectures) was given by Faraday and his subject was "The Chemical History of a Candle." Theje lectures a t Christmas time became very popular. Faraday gave nineteen series and many famous chemists have had the honor and pleasure of giving this holiday series. Faraday's first lectures on the candle were repeated by him several times, the last occasion being at Christmas, 1860, when he was an old man. These lectures had become so famous by that time, they were taken down in shorthand by the notable English chemist, William Crookes, who printed them in his journal, the Chemical News,and later edited them for publication (1861). "The Chemical History of a Candle" is a classic and is one of Faraday's important contributions to chemistry. The various courses of lectures started a t the Royal Institution by Faraday's predecessors were continued by him, improvements and extensions being made as the field of chemistry expanded. Many were delivered at regular times by Faraday-all of course in the theater, as it is called-and were official records of his investigations in chemistry and electricity or accounts of the progress in physical science. These lectures which were invariably prepared with care and liberally illustrated by experiments, frequently consumed an excessive amount of time at some critical stage of his investigations. But Faraday looked upon his lecturing as a solemn duty, a duty to contribute all he could to the progress of science in a precise, accurate, comprehensible way. We have omitted many of Faraday's minor contributions to chemistry. In numerous cases these are woven into his major contributions or are an integral part of investigations not exclusively chemical. Enough bas been recorded in this article, however, to show that Faraday's contributions to chemistry justify our claim that he was a chemist of the fint rank. Bibliography BENCE-JONES, H., "Life and Letters of Michael Faraday." Longmans, Green & Co., New York City, 1870. BENCE-JONES, H., "The Royal Institution, Its Founder and First Professor," Longmans, Green & Co.. New York City. 1871. TYNDALL. JOHN, "Faraday as a Discoverer." D. Appleton & Co., New York City, 1868. GLADSTONE, .Tom H., "Michael Faraday," Macmillan Ca., New York City. 1872. THOMPSON, SYLVANUS P., "Michael Faraday," Macmillan Co., New York City,

1898.

TILDEN, SIRWILLIAMA., "Famous Chemists," George Routledge London, E. P. Dutton & Co., New York City, 1921.

&

Sons, Ltd.,

1522


AUGUST,1931

SCHORLEMMER, CARL, ''Rise and Development of Organic Chemistry," Macmillan Co., New York City, 1894. HARDEN,WILLETT L., "Liquefaction of Gases," Macmillan Co., New York City, 1899.

FARADAY, "The Liquefaction of Gases," Alembic Club Reprints, No. 12, Edinburgh. 1904.

FARADAY, ''Chemical History of a Candle," v. d. Qurterly Journal of Science of the Royal Institution and Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (for references see Alembic Club Reprints and H. Bence-Jones' "Life and Letters of Michael Faraday," cited above).

Faraday's contributions to chemistry - Journal of Chemical Education

Recommend Documents